ARSA info request for Izzy

Yes, yes... leave nothing to entice them back with either. Don't let the door hit you in the back, right?

~ Duane Phillips.

Nor do I want to see ANYONE in jail or in any legal complications.

The contents of my last few posts were, perhaps, inappropriate for their intended message.

I was "beating Iz about the head and shoulders" trying to get him to grasp the concept of possible legal liability regarding unfounded public statements of illegal activity. That's all. My method was wrong, but I didn't want to mention the L word unless I had to.

I'm violating my own principles of unity here, so I'm out this altogether.

Final remarks:

I have an extreme suspicion towards Izzy's underlying motives and goals, and by association, ARSA's, in respect to the "Reinventing the TRA", or whatever he calls it now, campaign. He has not convinced me otherwise at all to this point (I am more suspicious now, than initially), but it takes two to maintain a fight and fighting right now is not, IMHO, good for the hobby while we are (or should be) fighting for regulatory relief from the real enemy and capitalizing on our positive exposure viv-a-vis SRN,FlyRockets, and the Rocket Challenge.

And, it is making it appear that I disagree with Jerry Irvine on most things (since he tirelessly defends Izzy from his honest hatred of the TRA). I do disagree with him on several issues, but I do not believe Jerry has any agendas other than those we have all been able to memorize verbatim by now. ;) I honestly believe he still has much to contribute to sport rocketry.

Only time will tell if my suspicions were correct.

The sad part is there is no liability since the things he said are objectively true and based on my own 10 years of court experience in 4 venues, there is more than enough evidence to not only keep izzy from being suied for libel but also plenty to convict about 20 people for actual crimes and the standard of proof on that is very high.

I do not share that fear.

It is not ARSA's business to reinvent TRA nor do I see ARSA trying to do that at any level. On those matters Izzy speaks for himself alone as well as anybody who posts to the thread in support of his comments. They are NOT ARSA issues.

TRA/NAR is not fighting for regulatory relief "for real". If they were, they would get relief where they have a direct vote: NFPA regs, and/or where they have unilateral authority (association policies, particularly with regard to motor certs).

One option they had instead of filing the expensive and timesuck lawsuit was simply to BEHAVE as if everything in the suit they claimed was actually the way it is (like it actually is).

But not only did they file suit (thus annoying the giant) but ALSO act like the ATF is right pending its resolution including FORCING vendors to also follow that extraordinarilly bad policy.

The best thing they could do right now for the suit is start today, this hour, to behave as if they already won. I alone stand ready to persue that path immediately and without any reservations at all.

Thanks.

We are not powerless to act. We are powerless to force TRA and NAR to do the right thing TODAY if they have bad management and error filled strategies proven to fail in practice.

NFPA rents a room. The NFPA committee is "us". Period.

Jerry

If you're not a member of TRA, you'd have to be a member of NAR to fly at their launches, right? I know NAR recognizes TRA certs, if you are a member of both don't they automatically give you the same cert level in NAR? If so, then you'd still retain your cert through them if you left TRA.

So now ARSA isn't even an organization, just a "publisher"? How is it possible to "join" a publisher? And how can a publisher have local clubs, as listed on the ARSA website?

"commited" does not equate to "convicted of", and vice versa

commit v. committed v. tr.

1. To do, perform, or perpetrate:

convict v. convicted v. tr.

1. Law. To find or prove (someone) guilty of an offense or crime, especially by the verdict of a court

is your friend

- iz

RayDunak> Iz alleged:

I wasn't asked specifically about ARSA structure, I was asked when the named events did or would occur, and how

- iz

RayDunak> Iz wrote:

Perhaps, if one fails to consider the individual's personal vendetta against the organization that he is accusing. However, since his accusations relate to motor certs that have long since expired anyway, wouldn't it be more prudent to consult with the _current_ TMT chair as to whether the alleged problems have been resolved?

I am NAR member 80381

no, they don't.

Bunny, can you verify this?

n/a

- iz

when you consider the fact that TRA represented that the motors had been certified during JC's tenure, when in fact they had not, JC's concern that such false statements reflect on his actions as TMT chair, certainly justify his personal grievance (over and above the other effects of the fraudulent certifications; e.g.; impact on insurance)

that is reasonable and your characterization of a "personal vendetta" is misplaced.

that would speak to, as you say, "whether the alleged problems have been resolved"

regardless of whether they were or were not (resolved since), it does not negate the fact that the motor certs had not been performed at the time that the Certified Motors List indicated that they had been

- iz

Yes, they do. But not "automatically", and not L3. See:

7 or the bottom of the page. "grandfathered" for 1 & 2. No mention of 3 presumable because TRA doesn't believe in increasing the risk of failure in flight (affecting many) by attempting to reduce the risk on the ground (affecting few).

Joel. phx

I don't find any such statement on the TRA page. Anyone, anyone?

It is the ONLY retort he has!!!

Jerry

I wasn't asked specifically about ARSA structure....

JC and I are in communication out of band (as I am with many people in the hobby), and I chose to quote or post JC as an authoritative source of historical information regarding TRA & TMT operations

Duane wrote:

often

always

- iz

Did I make any reference to "launching rockets"? No. I merely stated that as an "unicorporated association" that ALL members may be responsible for actions of another member of the association... what ever that may be. Including, but not resticted to financial debts. And my point was... so what makes ARSA any less of a risk than say what the board of (incorporated) TRA poses to TRA members?... who have little if no risk in regards to what the TRA board does. Not only are TRA members covered under a corporate veil, volunteers of a 501(c)(3) nonprofit normally are covered under the "Volunteer Protection Act"... volunteers of "unicorporated associations" are NOT.

Let's see how quick Izzy changes his stance if ARSA ever gets sued. ;)

Also... interesting that you state that ARSA is a "mere publisher"... hmmm so you are saying that they are NOT really a rocket organization??? So what do they publish? BTW... Pravada is a publisher too. ;)

Cheetah